[QGIS-Developer] Some thought on LTR

[Paolo Cavallini]

H
i all,

On 07/08/19 12:05, Marco Bernasocchi wrote:

> - there is a sort of "regression obsession", IMO bugs are bugs, and they
> should ideally be fixed whenever possible (also see Jürgen's answer on
> another tread [1])

I agree 50% here. Of course obsessions are bad. However, breaking an
existing functionality scares people away from upgrading, and undermines
the credibility of the project. Having people using older version has
always been an issue for the project.

> - assessing a "low chance of regression" is a gray area and as Nyall
> said before "...every bug fix, regardless of how trivial it seems,
> brings with it the increased chances of regressions into the stable LTR
> release..."

fully agreed, this is obviously the main problem here.

> - on the economical point of view,  limiting the bugs that can be fixed
> in an LTR will make it very difficult to actually get larger users to
> pay for bug-fixing, they are the target group for the LTR and slowly
> they are understanding that fixing bugs needs resources. To me limiting
> the amount of bugs that can be fixed in an LTR would be a very unwise
> move since it would also reduce the number of bugs that get fixed in non
> LTR releases.

this is also a good point. of course clearcut solutions are impossible,
so I think it's just a matter of personal judgment. The only practical
alternative I see is the one below.

>>  I don't see a way to decide other than relying on the
>> developer's assessment. The only (costly) improvement I'd see is having
>> another independent core dev to check any bugfix before accepting it.

All the best.

-- 
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS.ORG Chair:
http://planet.qgis.org/planet/user/28/tag/qgis%20board/